blob: 45252abe225b249a5103dc86ffeab34d7df5a8d8 (
plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <bytecoin@gmx.com>) id 1W3wfd-0003Cc-MJ
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 16 Jan 2014 23:48:21 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmx.com
designates 212.227.17.21 as permitted sender)
client-ip=212.227.17.21; envelope-from=bytecoin@gmx.com;
helo=mout.gmx.net;
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1W3wfb-0001Yy-Q7
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 16 Jan 2014 23:48:21 +0000
Received: from mailout-eu.gmx.com ([10.1.101.214]) by mrigmx.server.lan
(mrigmx001) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MEHTC-1W67Rl1C8W-00FUS6 for
<bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Fri, 17 Jan 2014 00:48:13 +0100
Received: (qmail 17646 invoked by uid 0); 16 Jan 2014 23:48:13 -0000
Received: from 86.167.211.185 by rms-eu013 with HTTP
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="========GMXBoundary168531389916091236067"
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 00:48:11 +0100
From: "Byte Coin" <bytecoin@gmx.com>
Message-ID: <20140116234811.168530@gmx.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Flags: 0001
X-Mailer: GMX.com Web Mailer
x-registered: 0
X-GMX-UID: 7AqqcrEgeSEqKDzgvnMhuMt+IGRvb0Ch
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(bytecoin[at]gmx.com)
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust [212.227.17.21 listed in list.dnswl.org]
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
X-Headers-End: 1W3wfb-0001Yy-Q7
Subject: [Bitcoin-development] Reusable addresses
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 23:48:21 -0000
--========GMXBoundary168531389916091236067
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
I'm very pleased that my old idea is getting some traction and that I have been appropriately credited!
I also think the term "reusable addresses" is preferable to anything to do with "stealth" for the reasons mentioned.
You should note that the privacy guarantees they provide are not that strong but their limitations have been adequately discussed elsewhere.
On an unrelated note - I'd like to solicit some help in restoring access to my Bytecoin account on http://bitcointalk.org/
Cheers!
Bytecoin
--========GMXBoundary168531389916091236067
Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<span style=3D'font-family:Verdana'><span style=3D'font-size:12px'>I'm very=
pleased that my old idea is getting some traction and that I have been app=
ropriately credited!<br />I also think the term "reusable addresses" is pre=
ferable to anything to do with "stealth" for the reasons mentioned.<br /><b=
r />You should note that the privacy guarantees they provide are not that s=
trong but their limitations have been adequately discussed elsewhere.<br />=
<br />On an unrelated note - I'd like to solicit some help in restoring acc=
ess to my Bytecoin account on http://bitcointalk.org/<br /><br />Cheers!<br=
/><br />Bytecoin</span></span>
--========GMXBoundary168531389916091236067--
|
